Connect with us

Markets

Google Beats Oracle on $9 Billion Copyright Claim

Published

on

Oracle Google

Google won a jury verdict that kills Oracle Corp.’s claim to a $9 billion slice of the search giant’s Android phone business.

Oracle contended that Google needed a license to use its Java programming language to develop Android, the operating system in 80 percent of the world’s mobile devices. Jurors in San Francisco federal court on Thursday rejected that argument and concluded Google made fair use of the code under copyright law.

A decision against Google had the potential to give significantly more weight to software copyrights, and to spur litigation to protect those added rights. Oracle — which started the trial at an advantage with the judge explaining that it had already been established that Google had infringed Oracle’s copyrights — plans to appeal, though legal experts said overturning a jury verdict will be difficult.

Google relied on witnesses including former Chief Executive Officer Eric Schmidt, who is now chairman of parent company Alphabet Inc., to convince jurors that it used Java to innovate, rather than merely copy code. Before joining Google, Schmidt worked at Sun Microsystems developing and marketing Java. Oracle acquired Sun in 2010 and Schmidt was involved in Google’s failed licensing negotiations that spurred the copyright-infringement lawsuit filed that year by the database maker.

Schmidt told jurors that, based on his “many years of experience” with Java, he believed Google was permitted to use the APIs — the shortcuts that allow developers to write programs to work across software platforms — without a negotiated license, as long as the company relied on its own code. Sun promoted them as “free and open,” and not sold or licensed separately from Java, he said.

Central to Oracle’s bid for what would have been one of the largest jury verdicts in U.S. history was its claim that Google has reaped $21 billion in profit from more than 3 billion activations of Android. Oracle sought damages of $8.8 billion, plus $475 million in what it claims was lost licensing revenue.

Appeal Grounds

“We strongly believe that Google developed Android by illegally copying core Java technology to rush into the mobile device market,” Oracle General Counsel Dorian Daley said in a statement. “Oracle brought this lawsuit to put a stop to Google’s illegal behavior. We believe there are numerous grounds for appeal.”

Google relied on a “free-market” argument, said Tyler Ochoa, a professor at Santa Clara University School of Law who has followed the case closely since it was filed in 2010.

Google claimed it was within its rights to use the organization and labeling of the Java code to develop Android because programmers were already familiar with them, Ochoa said. Google’s message was that “Oracle shouldn’t ‘own’ programmers simply because they had taken the time to learn Java,” Ochoa said.

Ochoa was one of 41 academics who agreed with Google that the code at issue didn’t merit copyright protection and urged the U.S. Supreme Court to review the case. The high court last year declined to take it.

Android Ecosystem

“Today’s verdict that Android makes fair use of Java APIs represents a win for the Android ecosystem, for the Java programming community, and for software developers who rely on open and free programming languages to build innovative consumer products,” Google said in an e-mailed statement.

Oracle won a 2012 verdict that Google infringed its copyrights, but that jury couldn’t agree whether it was justified under the fair use legal doctrine. That set the stage for the second trial, featuring many of the witnesses from four years ago as well as the same judge, William Alsup.

Both sides leaned on powerful Silicon Valley personalities to put a shine on technology-laden arguments.

Ten Commandments

Oracle Co-Chief Executive Officer Safra Catz invoked the Ten Commandments to characterize Google as acting above the law. Catz told jurors that, at a bat mitzvah in 2012, Google General Counsel Kent Walker told her, “You know, Safra, Google is this really special company, and the old rules don’t apply to us.”

“I immediately said, ‘Thou shalt not steal,’” Catz testified. “It’s an oldie but goodie.”

Witnesses for Google said the company didn’t need a license for the Java’s application programming interfaces, or APIs, to build Android.

In cross-examinations of those witnesses, Oracle’s lawyers hit upon a disconnect between their testimony and selected e-mails while Android was being created. The messages showed Google executives and engineers were concerned that they needed, and didn’t get, a license for Java.

‘Making Enemies’

Google co-founder Larry Page was confronted with a 2005 internal e-mail posing the question of whether to drop the use of Java for Android or press ahead, “perhaps making enemies along the way.”

Page responded, “Obviously we didn’t do the first one.”

Michael Risch, a law professor at Villanova University School of Law in Pennsylvania who’s been following the case, said it will be difficult for Oracle to overturn the jury verdict because an appeals court will have to conclude the instructions to jurors on the legal issues in the case were flawed.

Before the verdict, Risch said the outcome was a “toss-up” and that it may not have been well-suited for a jury to decide.

“There should be a clear set of guidelines that allow companies to know when they may reuse functional aspects of another company’s copyrighted work, and submitting a fair use question to a jury fails in all respects,” Risch said.

The case is Oracle America Inc. v. Google Inc., 10-cv-03561, U.S. District Court, Northern District of California (San Francisco).

Is the CEO/Founder of Investors King Limited. A proven foreign exchange research analyst and a published author on Yahoo Finance, Businessinsider, Nasdaq, Entrepreneur.com, Investorplace, and many more. He has over two decades of experience in global financial markets.

Continue Reading
Comments

Crude Oil

Oil Prices Steady as Israel-Hamas Ceasefire Talks Offer Hope, Red Sea Attacks Persist

Published

on

markets energies crude oil

Amidst geopolitical tensions and ongoing conflicts, oil prices remained relatively stable as hopes for a ceasefire between Israel and Hamas emerged, while attacks in the Red Sea continued to escalate.

Brent crude oil, against which Nigerian oil is priced, saw a modest rise of 27 cents to $88.67 a barrel while U.S. West Texas Intermediate crude oil gained 30 cents to $82.93 a barrel.

The optimism stems from negotiations between Israel and Hamas with talks in Cairo aiming to broker a potential ceasefire.

Despite these diplomatic efforts, attacks in the Red Sea by Yemen’s Houthis persist, raising concerns about potential disruptions to oil supply routes.

Vandana Hari, founder of Vanda Insights, emphasized the importance of a concrete agreement to drive market sentiment, stating that the oil market awaits a finalized deal between the conflicting parties.

Meanwhile, investor focus remains on the upcoming U.S. Federal Reserve’s policy review, particularly in light of persistent inflationary pressures.

Market expectations for any rate adjustments have been pushed out due to stubborn inflation, potentially bolstering the U.S. dollar and impacting oil demand.

Concerns over demand also weigh on sentiment, with ANZ analysts noting a decline in premiums for diesel and heating oil compared to crude oil, signaling subdued demand prospects.

As geopolitical uncertainties persist and market dynamics evolve, observers closely monitor developments in both the Middle East and global economic policies for their potential impact on oil prices and market stability.

Continue Reading

Crude Oil

Oil Prices Sink 1% as Israel-Hamas Talks in Cairo Ease Middle East Tensions

Published

on

Crude oil - Investors King

Oil prices declined on Monday, shedding 1% of their value as Israel-Hamas peace negotiations in Cairo alleviated fears of a broader conflict in the Middle East.

The easing tensions coupled with U.S. inflation data contributed to the subdued market sentiment and erased gains made earlier.

Brent crude oil, against which Nigerian oil is priced, dropped by as much as 1.09% to 8.52 a barrel while West Texas Intermediate (WTI) oil fell by 0.99% to $83.02 a barrel.

The initiation of talks to broker a ceasefire between Israel and Hamas played a pivotal role in moderating geopolitical concerns, according to analysts.

A delegation from Hamas was set to engage in peace discussions in Cairo on Monday, as confirmed by a Hamas official to Reuters.

Also, statements from the White House indicated that Israel had agreed to address U.S. concerns regarding the potential humanitarian impacts of the proposed invasion.

Market observers also underscored the significance of the upcoming U.S. Federal Reserve’s policy review on May 1.

Anticipation of a more hawkish stance from the Federal Open Market Committee added to investor nervousness, particularly in light of Friday’s data revealing a 2.7% rise in U.S. inflation over the previous 12 months, surpassing the Fed’s 2% target.

This heightened inflationary pressure reduced the likelihood of imminent interest rate cuts, which are typically seen as stimulative for economic growth and oil demand.

Independent market analysts highlighted the role of the strengthening U.S. dollar in exacerbating the downward pressure on oil prices, as higher interest rates tend to attract capital flows and bolster the dollar’s value, making oil more expensive for holders of other currencies.

Moreover, concerns about weakening demand surfaced with China’s industrial profit growth slowing down in March, as reported by official data. This trend signaled potential challenges for oil consumption in the world’s second-largest economy.

However, amidst the current market dynamics, optimism persists regarding potential upside in oil prices. Analysts noted that improvements in U.S. inventory data and China’s Purchasing Managers’ Index (PMI) could reverse the downward trend.

Also, previous gains in oil prices, fueled by concerns about supply disruptions in the Middle East, indicate the market’s sensitivity to geopolitical developments in the region.

Despite these fluctuations, the market appeared to brush aside potential disruptions to supply resulting from Ukrainian drone strikes on Russian oil refineries over the weekend. The attack temporarily halted operations at the Slavyansk refinery in Russia’s Krasnodar region, according to a plant executive.

As oil markets navigate through geopolitical tensions and economic indicators, the outcome of ongoing negotiations and future data releases will likely shape the trajectory of oil prices in the coming days.

Continue Reading

Commodities

Cocoa Fever Sweeps Market: Prices Set to Break $15,000 per Ton Barrier

Published

on

Cocoa

The cocoa market is experiencing an unprecedented surge with prices poised to shatter the $15,000 per ton barrier.

The cocoa industry, already reeling from supply shortages and production declines in key regions, is now facing a frenzy of speculative trading and bullish forecasts.

At the recent World Cocoa Conference in Brussels, nine traders and analysts surveyed by Bloomberg expressed unanimous confidence in the continuation of the cocoa rally.

According to their predictions, New York futures could trade above $15,000 a ton before the year’s end, marking yet another milestone in the relentless ascent of cocoa prices.

The surge in cocoa prices has been fueled by a perfect storm of factors, including production declines in Ivory Coast and Ghana, the world’s largest cocoa producers.

Shortages of cocoa beans have left buyers scrambling for supplies and willing to pay exorbitant premiums, exacerbating the market tightness.

To cope with the supply crunch, Ivory Coast and Ghana have resorted to rolling over contracts totaling around 400,000 tons of cocoa, further exacerbating the scarcity.

Traders are increasingly turning to cocoa stocks held in exchanges in London and New York, despite concerns about their quality, as the shortage of high-quality beans intensifies.

Northon Coimbrao, director of sourcing at chocolatier Natra, noted that quality considerations have taken a backseat for most processors amid the supply crunch, leading them to accept cocoa from exchanges despite its perceived inferiority.

This shift in dynamics is expected to further deplete stocks and provide additional support to cocoa prices.

The cocoa rally has already seen prices surge by about 160% this year, nearing the $12,000 per ton mark in New York.

This meteoric rise has put significant pressure on traders and chocolate makers, who are grappling with rising margin calls and higher bean prices in the physical market.

Despite the challenges posed by soaring cocoa prices, stakeholders across the value chain have demonstrated a willingness to absorb the cost increases.

Jutta Urpilainen, European Commissioner for International Partnerships, noted that the market has been able to pass on price increases from chocolate makers to consumers, highlighting the resilience of the cocoa industry.

However, concerns linger about the eventual impact of the price surge on consumers, with some chocolate makers still covered for supplies.

According to Steve Wateridge, head of research at Tropical Research Services, the full effects of the price increase may take six months to a year to materialize, posing a potential future challenge for consumers.

As the cocoa market continues to navigate uncharted territory all eyes remain on the unfolding developments, with traders, analysts, and industry stakeholders bracing for further volatility and potential record-breaking price levels in the days ahead.

Continue Reading
Advertisement




Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement

Trending